I know for an almost certainty that no man-made religions are real. First of all because they are all made up by men, ancient men, and that is reflected in the outdated scripture context. I have trouble rationalizing details like these.
I can not rationalize moses parting a sea because that is simply impossible. I can not rationalize Noahs Ark and the great flood because it never happened. Do you know what would happen if every human on earth was born from the same two people? We'd all have missing brain lobes and 17 toes.
There is no consistency in the bible and it simply does not test with the reality we know today, 2000 years after it was compiled and written by numerous men in an ancient language. Why would that be the case if it truly was written through the power of god? If scripture isn't the factual word of God then what proof for religion do you have at all? None I think.
If the bible isn't the way to god then Christianity is not the way to god and neither is Islam or Judaism. So were the ancient Egyptians correct? Or what about some crazy African tribe in Zimbabwe that believes in the god of the forest floor? Maybe they got it right.
And, because I can't prove beyond a doubt that the Christian god is made up, this also means that no one can prove that Zues, Odin, or Osiris are made up.
I don't think the Bible (or any of the other religious scriptures for that matter) should be so taken literally, neither by atheists nor by zealots. It consists of stories compiled over a long period of time, reflecting the societies that existed then and their concerns. Compare the Old with the New Testament; yes, these are not consistent in their portrayal of God (Wrathful Vengeance vs. Love You Guys), but because it's religion, because it's spiritual, it's more about the message than the physical reality. Thus, the story about Moses parting the Red Sea (or managing the swamp, if that were the case) is more about attesting to the power of faith and assuring the believer that when it really matters, God will find a way to help you; you are not alone. Same with the rest of the content of the Bible; it's moral lessons taught to people who lived in societies that were deemed to need them. Not everything may be relevant today (such as the condemnation of homosexuality, the general stupidity regarding women and their uncleanliness, etc), but a lot of it still is. It may not be the word of God - but that doesn't prove that a God doesn't exist. What about all other religious scriptures? In the end, it only matters to all the most zealously religious who is "right" in their intepretation of the manifestations of God. There is nothing that says there has to be one right answer and lots of wrong ones. Why can't all be right? Scriptures are written by men, who interpret the word of God. Why would the intepretations not be different, depending on the society they live in?
Religion, or spirituality, has been part of humanity for a very long time. You talk condescendingly about a "crazy African tribe" (as an aside; tribes in Africa are largely European and imperialist constructs anyway) worshipping a god of the forest, well that's what all people, everywhere, did at a certain point in time. Nature was our god, because nature ultimately controlled everything we did. Spirituality, the belief in something greater than ourselves, has always been there (albeit in less organised forms), and that, I feel, has to count for something. It's not about taking things so literally, and trying to prove something by doing so.
By the way, this
"Heaven is a fairy tale invented by human imagination. And each person's fairy tale is different.
There is also the absurdity that comes when you compare any two people's views of heaven. For some it involves harps and clouds and halos. For others it involves hot and cold running virgins. For some people, the actual body is transported magically to heaven as described in the "Left Behind" books. For others, your "soul" floats out of the body and makes it way to St. Peter. And so on. People make up anything they like, because heaven is a completely imaginary place. "
is probably one of the worst arguments I have ever read, and I have read quite a few in my day. It's poorly worded, it draws on no kind of evidence whatsoever. "Compare any two people" - who did he compare? what were their actual answers? And when, pray tell, did they die and go to heaven? You can't ask people what the moon is like and expect their answers to be the same if they've never been there. No scientific method applied whatsoever, I see - "heaven's imaginary", well gosh oh my, ya think? Heaven is an idea that no living person has ever seen, it can't be examined scientifically. Debunking a philosophical, abstract idea simply because people have different interpretations of what it entails - that doesn't prove anything. It's a philosophical question, concerned with interpretation - it is not possible to prove anyone wrong in such an argument. Therefore, you can neither confirm nor reject the existence of God through claiming that heaven's imaginary. So what if it is? The notion of divinity is not intimately tied to the existence of a "heaven". There are religions where rebirth is the way to go. We're not just talking Christianity here, we're talking all religions.
And as for my own stance on this, I shall steal a friend's expression and say that I'm spiritual, not religious. Most of the people I know who are most concerned with logic in their studies and professions (medicine, any of the sciences, engineering, maths and so on) have faith. It's us social science/liberal arts people who tend to be mainly agnostics and atheists.
